Peter Strong: What the rise of independents in politics could mean for small business
Many volunteers for independent candidates were small business people. “So why would small business people get involved?” asks Peter Strong.
I thought I knew a lot about community yet here I was — like a minnow in a sea of knowledge, passion, desire and reason.
I recently participated in a panel as part of an on-line convention called Empowered Communities — Next Steps. It is an event of the Community Independents Project (CIP). The CIP was established by Cathy McGowan, the previous independent member for the federal electorate of Indi, and by Alana Johnson, Jill Briggs and Tina Jackson. The CIP aims to “to enable communities and community independent candidates to build participatory democracy and conduct successful election campaigns”.
What does the rise of an independent movement mean for small business people? People who are always based right inside an electorate and who vote.
Many volunteers for these independents were small business people. So why would small business people get involved? Aren’t they too busy?
Because they want a voice. They want to be listened to. Simple.
In my time as CEO of COSBOA, it was a common comment I received from small business folk — something like ‘it’s great that small business has a voice that is impartial and based on fact’. That independent voice would not have been achieved without support of member associations and their small business members. Small business people vote. In the electorates where the major parties lost, a lot of small business people voted for change.
People want a voice — a real voice.
So, has CIP been successful?
Well, in the 2022 federal election some 20,000 people volunteered to help get independents elected. That is an astounding figure when you consider that the Liberals and Labor each have around 60,000 members nationwide, a membership base developed over many decades.
This convention bought together more than 450 people from more than 100 different electorates. (It is important to note that 400 of the participants were women.)
After checking with the organisers, it seems there were three main types of participants: the majority — those involved in previous campaigns (e.g. the volunteers) who wanted to celebrate and discuss the future; then there were those wanting to get an independent elected in their community; and there were the others who just wanted to know what was going on, to see how things worked and perhaps to see if it was ridgy-didge — it was and is.
Initially I made the mistake of thinking most participants were from the election teams of the so-called ‘teal’ independents. And let’s stop there for a minute — while many commentators regularly refer to the ‘teals’ I feel, after attending the CIP convention, that it’s very misleading. For example, Helen Haines from the Indi electorate is from a rural electorate and other independents are from inner city seats — very different electorates and communities. They should not be grouped together as that does them all a disservice.
Have no doubt that I and the independents don’t always agree; and the independents can’t and don’t always agree among themselves and it would be a rare event to see all the current independents ever agree totally (think of Bob Katter).
The use of the term ‘teal” may actually suit the media, the major parties, and their supporters, as it gives the impression that these independents are an homogenous group — just like a party. They certainly aren’t and I will use the term ‘community independents’ from now on.
At the last election some communities got what they wanted — an independent voice. In the other communities where independents were not elected, the volunteers were given an opportunity to engage in politics without the chains of a party machine. It gave the chance to learn and to be the change they wanted to be, to be active in their own communities. The convention provided participants a chance to ‘ look at themselves’, to talk to each other, to be engaged in a collective movement not in a cumbersome party run from outside their community.
Listening to the speakers and seeing the comments, you could tell many of these people are still in a wonderful shock with the outcome. After the first session of celebration and networking the rest of the convention focused on expanding skills and knowledge to prepare for the next steps. My panel was facilitated by Cathy McGowan and included two of the longer-term independents MPs — Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo) and Andrew Wilkie (Clark). The panel’s subject was “Insider Tactics: How to get things done with MPs and Peak Bodies”. The discussion was very real and based on reality not loyalty to a power broker, just loyalty to community and areas of particular need.
So how did this all happen? First, Cathy McGowan, the face of CIP, knows how to find and work with communities interested in having a greater say in their future. McGowan knows how to enable community to empower itself with advice and information as needed. I believe she knows that nothing will be achieved if the driver of change is an outsider. CIP doesn’t drive change, it advises those who want it.
I made a comment to the convention that in a previous role I frequently addressed meetings of the Liberal Party and the Labor Party. In those meetings I always congratulated the those present for being members of a party, as change is created by those who turn up. The party meetings were good and constructive.
The difference between the CIP convention and the meetings of the mainstream parties is quite profound. In the convention there was not one mention of unions or laissez-faire economics. There were no discordant issues raising their heads. There were no concurrent ‘backroom’ meetings being held to try to control the agenda. No one was playing factional games.
There were no members of the religious right or fanatical socialists trying to impose their will. There were no threats of withdrawing support. There were no heated arguments about ideology. There were also no long-winded speeches — excellent! The convention was open, inclusive and very real.
In the modern world it seems the biggest influence on the major parties is too often: their head offices; and/or unions; and/or the proponents of some type of economic ideology. It is often not the needs of a particular community.
The lesson here to the major parties is that they must empower the locals to have a true say if they want to be in power. Otherwise, the next Parliament will very likely see the current independents retain their seats while Labor loses seats to more independents, thus creating a minority government.
We all live local. Yet outsiders always try to tell us what to do and how to do it. The election of so many independents and the interest from those in at least 90 other electorates shows that people are fed up with not having a say — including the community-based businesses — the small and family business folk.
If the last election is any indication, it seems they will have a say.
